Inglourious Basterds Review

Viewing Medium: DVD (redbox)

Previously Seen: No

My Rating: A-

My Tagline: Good clean Nazi-killing fun

My Recommendation: If you like Tarantino in general, just go ahead and buy this one...

I enjoyed almost every minute of this latest Tarantino work. From the very beginning, he lets the acting shine through, utilizing close-ups and long takes for a feeling of tension the whole way through. Often he will focus on one character's reaction to a scene, rather than capture the entire scene. This gives it a very personal feel.

The title and promoting of he film is somewhat misleading, because the plot follows three separate but converging attempts to kill Nazis, not just those of Brad Pitt's basterds.

The acting and cinematography were above average all around. Brad Pitt was fun to watch, although his best lines were already viewed in the trailers for the film. I would be remiss if I didn't mention the charming yet sinister Col. Landa played by Christoph Waltz. He definitely stole the show, which has already earned him several awards, and he definitely has my vote for Best Supporting Actor.

My ONLY complaint is that QT shot this film in some places as if it were another Pulp Fiction or Kill Bill. It's so good that it does not need to be interrupted by his standard character-intro sequences, or by grating, annoying soundtracks during the violent scenes.

Overall, it was good clean Nazi-killing fun, with superb acting and direction. The way that the different storylines came together could have been reconciled better. (There are three unrelated conspirator plots that converge on the same location, and apparently ALL are successful, without endangering the others?) I rate this film "91 out of 100 Nazi scalps."

First Movie Seen In 2010: "2012"

Viewing Medium: Theater
Previously Seen: No
My Overall Rating: D
My Tagline: What can I say, Avatar was sold out.
Recommendation: Skip it.

This was truly a disaster movie. It was also ABOUT a disaster! I seriously think '2012' was the most predictable movie I have EVER seen. *Disclaimer: I have never seen 'Free Willy;' Please don't tell me what happens...* Yes, I expect the basic plot to be predictable in a movie like this, so I can forgive that if the filmmakers offer something new. This movie offered nothing new. The characters and scenarios could have been picked out of a catalog. "Estranged ex-wife and kids, check! Somber president, check! Misguided government official, check!"

The visual effects, which I thought would be the reason to see this film, were decent, but didn't impress me very much. The predictability killed any excitement from the action. The movie was scattered with many extraneous characters (such as the scientist's father) which were obviously intended to create emotions for the main characters (and the audience) when killed off. It didn't work.

Another major drawback is that throughout the flick, the characters' survival is mostly by luck, not because of their own heroic efforts. Sure, they did some good driving, flying, driving again, and then flying again, and then driving again, then swimming, then finally boating to escape the end of the world! But if the earthquake/fireball/tsunami/etc. had been just a few feet closer they would have been toast many times.

Overall, I was bored by the predictability. In this film about cataclysmic violence, the producers would have been more than justified in killing off some unexpected characters, even characters that the audience likes. But first they would have to create some good characters, so I guess that's out!

Now the fun part: I pick apart holes in the plot. ***SPOILER ALERT***

When John Cusack's character brings the kids back early from camping at his ex-wife's request, she invites him for breakfast. He says he's late for work. If he ended he camping trip early, he should still be on vacation.

As mankind is getting ready to evacuate, the Somber President(tm) stays behind to "warn the people." His warning doesn't save anyone (he doesn't even give anyone his place on the escape ship) and he doesn't appoint a new leader, which causes predictable power struggles, endangering humanity's survival.

At the end of the film the floodwaters recede after only 27 days, and they head for Africa to rebuild. I doubt the continent would be habitable any time soon, specially after the flooding and elevation changes they describe.

The governments of 46 different nations kept secret the near-term destruction of earth and the construction of at least 7 super-cruise-liners for 3 years. From the look of the film, these are bigger than aircraft carriers, which take 7 years to build. Here is a good article that breaks down some of the challenges of building such a ship. Even if it was financed by billionaires as in the film, the ships would require an ever-expanding circle of secrecy to build, exponentially increasing the chance of discovery. The more people who know the secret, the more escape tickets you have to provide, and the more worthless currency becomes. What good is a billion euros after the end of the world?